Environmental campaigners have their convictions quashed

ENVIRONMENTAL campaigners convicted of offences after a power station protest where a police officer was working undercover have had their convictions quashed.

The Court of Appeal, in London, overturned the convictions of 29 protestors who ambushed a freight train on its way to the Drax power station, in North Yorkshire.

The move followed the collapse of a case against six protestors who invaded the coal-fired Ratcliffe-on-Soar power station in Notts.

In both cases, the protestors were spied on by undercover cop PC Mark Kennedy, who spent seven years posing as long-haired dropout Mark Stone.

His involvement in the Ratcliffe-on-Soar case led to its collapse in 2011, and a review of undercover policing. Six protestors had been accused of planning to invade the power station.

In 2012, the then director of public prosecutions Keir Starmer said there were concerns about the safety of the convictions which followed the Drax protest in 2008, and invited them to be challenged.

And in the Court of Appeal this week, those convictions were overturned by the Lord Chief Justice Lord Thomas, Mr Justice Simon and Mr Justice Irwin.

Outside court, Beth Stratford, speaking on behalf of the 29, said: “We are pleased because this shines a light on the underhand tactics of the police and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) in their policing of political movements.

“It underlines further the need for public independent inquiry into the use of political policing.”

The 29 campaigners ambushed a freight train as it took fuel to Drax, which is the largest coal-fired power station in Europe.

Participants in the non-violent protest were sentenced at Leeds Crown Court in 2009 and 2010 for obstructing the railway.

They were charged with obstructing engines or carriages on railways, which is an offence under the Malicious Damage Act 1861.

The convictions were quashed because of the failure in the Drax case to disclose the fact that Mr Kennedy had been working undercover in the protest.

Lord Thomas said: “There was a complete and total failure, for reasons which remain unclear, to make a disclosure fundamental to the defence.”

Lord Thomas said Mr Kennedy, who hired a van and transported activists to the site, kept a detailed record of what happened and made reports to his handler, who communicated them to senior police officers in West Yorkshire.

“None of that was disclosed at the trial or at any time prior to it.”

It appeared that the failure to disclose Mr Kennedy's involvement was “either the fault of the police or someone at the CPS or possibly counsel involved”.

According to the records of Mr Kennedy’s handler, he was the sole driver in the protest.

It could not be categorically stated that the event would or would not have taken place without his involvement, but if that had been disclosed, as it should, issues would have been raised before the trial as to whether there had been an abuse of process or whether Mr Kennedy acted as an agent provocateur.

Lord Thomas asked counsel to prepare written submissions on the question of who should be responsible for the “substantial” legal costs incurred, to be decided at a later date.